TLA Home 

Partnering to Cultivate New Learning Leaders: Dean & Faculty Collaboration

By Tracy Edwards and Helen Clarke

For the past decade, Valencia Community College has searched for a dynamic and structured faculty development program that would provide a positive impact on student performance. After working through a mostly orientation approach to professional development for our pre-tenure faculty -- one that relied primarily on seat-time measures, Valencia revisited the program. The need to revamp this program became evident as we attempted to create legitimate meaning of our learning-centered initiative. This program shift resulted in a highly individualized, competency-based program designed to support one of the College’s strategic goals -- to establish learning leaders. The creation of a transparent, peer-driven tenure process supported by a professional development program designed specifically for tenure candidates surfaced. This transition involved a principled process that began with attention to the literature and included all the stakeholders in the program design process. The resulting faculty development program and tenure process created a fresh partnering among deans and faculty members designed to cultivate new learning leaders that "…engage students in learning by aligning practices with learning-centered principles, making our environment welcoming and inclusive, and implementing systems responsive to the demands of scholarship" (Armour, 2002).

We began our design process with an optimistic trust in the literature, assured that we if we could support our new teachers’, librarians’, and counselors’ quest to help students learn, Valencia would indeed develop into a mature learning college. As Terry O’Banion reminded us, "The implications are vast for assessment of learning, design of instruction, formulation of policy, and conduct of college business" (1997). The process of designing and developing a transparent tenure process supported by what came to be known as the Teaching/Learning Academy encompassed O’Banion’s spectrum of implications. The initial program design relied on a highly, and at times, challenging collaborative process. Staff from the Office for Curriculum Development, Teaching and Learning worked closely with faculty members representing a range of disciplines and all the campuses, along with all of the deans and program administrators who supervise tenure-seeking faculty. In addition, the Faculty Association and the College Learning Council regularly commented on this work. Before we asked, "What is it we want our faculty to know," and "How will we know they have learned," we began by establishing the following shared program design principles:

The Teaching/Learning Academy staff, along with the dean, supports each tenure candidate’s Individualized Learning Plan (ILP), a tenure-track faculty member’s professional development design. The ILP, written by the candidate in collaboration with his or her dean, spells out what the faculty member wants to learn, achieve, or accomplish during the pre-tenure process. This plan, expressed through specific learning outcomes, should be based on genuine need and desire to improve his or her teaching, counseling or librarianship. If the plan seems superfluous to the professional life of the candidate, then perhaps it is not the best ILP. The heart of the plan, the learning outcomes, relate to the development of the following Essential Competencies of a Valencia Educator:

Learning outcomes connect to the candidate’s professional practice, considering both pedagogy and discipline. For example, most candidates conduct one action research project, an effective method for evaluating the relationship between innovation and student learning. The ILP further identifies the specific professional development activities the candidate intends to engage in while accomplishing his or her Learning Outcomes. These activities, identified by the dean and candidate, cover a wide range of professional development possibilities. The Teaching/Learning Academy, sometimes confused with the pre-tenure process itself, is actually the tenure candidate’s faculty development support system. Through a core curriculum, the Academy provides support on pedagogy, course design, student development, and professional portfolio development through a variety of delivery modes. Since the Academy’s curriculum directly supports the Essential Competencies, most candidates find the Academy to be the most efficient development support vehicle; however, candidates may pursue development opportunities outside the Academy such as independent reading or graduate courses. Likewise, candidate’s often come to their new position well versed in a particular competency and find they do not need to spend further time investigating a particular competency. A comprehensive description of the Academy can be found online at http://faculty.valencia.cc.fl.us/development/Programs/TLA_academy/About%20Us/tla_description.htm

Candidates for tenure have the option of demonstrating their growth in the Essential Competencies and achievement of their learning outcomes in a paper, digital or combination portfolio. Based on the Valencia Standards of Scholarship, review panels assess and eventually evaluate portfolio artifacts that demonstrate the candidate’s learning outcomes. In keeping with the shared principle of formative assessment, a review panel comprised of tenured faculty colleagues and the dean provide annual feedback on developing individualized pre-tenure work. The panel examines the work and then meets with the candidate, after which a report to the record is provided to the candidate. Ideally, the feedback enriches the candidate’s ILP work. At the end of the three-year process, the panel provides a final evaluation and that report becomes one of the elements used to determine the tenure decision.

We began this process only eighteen months ago intending to make our professional development process for pre-tenure faculty more learning-centered -- to make this experience more individualized, more centered around teaching and learning, and to provide ongoing collegial feedback. Our initial goal was to help support learning leadership in our new full-time faculty. Through developing the mechanisms for assessment, we indeed discovered an unforeseen potential for learning leadership development. As we have helped prepare our deans and tenured faculty to provide reliable and useful feedback on how well tenure candidates demonstrated the Essential Competencies, we began working with individuals from our academic community who otherwise had not traditionally participated in faculty development activities. We can now see a ripple effect. Through the ILP Review Panel experience, senior faculty and deans have the opportunity to learn much from the new faculty about what it means to participate in a learning-centered institution. Though we have positive results thus far, as we proceed through the second year of this new model, we find that old habits are hard to break. For example, initial feedback from candidates reveals that some tenure candidates are often insecure about submitting work in progress to peer reviewers.

In the end, we take program assessment seriously. At this point, we are creating models to measure the effect this program and process has on the professional growth of our pre-tenured faculty, and most importantly, the effect their growth has on student learning. Additionally, we will examine the effect this assessment process has had on tenured faculty and on deans. Although the design and implementation process presents ongoing challenges, we believe we are on the path to successful learning-centered reform of an important faculty development program, with implications more far-reaching than we had expected.

• Angelo, T. and Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Armour, L., Colburn, R., and Shugart, S. "Strategic Learning Goal 3: Learning Leaders." http://valenciacc.edu/president/papers/LearningLeaders.asp (2001).
• Frost, S. H. (1991). Academic Advising for Student Success: A System of Shared Responsibility. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Reports. Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of Education Human Development.
• Glassick, C.E., Huber M.T., Maeroff, G.I. (1997). Scholarship Assessed: Evaluation of the Professoriate. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• O’Banion, T. (1997). A Learning-centered College for the 21^st Century. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.
• Seldin, P. (1997). The Teaching Portfolio: A Practical Guide to Improved Performance and Promotion/Tenure Decisions. Bolton, MA: Anker P.

For a complete list of references considered in our faculty development efforts, please see Valencia’s Learning-centered Reference Guide online at:
http://faculty.valencia.cc.fl.us/development/resources/flipbook/21_references.htm